NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Back Over Prevention complaints
5 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Jun 30, 2026
Back Over PreventionLane DepartureUnknown Or OtherCrashInjury
On May 24, 2026, at approximately 8:28 AM, I activated Actually Smart Summon on my 2025 Tesla Model 3 using the Tesla mobile application to reverse the vehicle from my garage. Before this incident, the vehicle displayed no warnings, alerts, messages, or other indication of a problem, and I had previously usd Actually Smart Summo…
Read full complaint
On May 24, 2026, at approximately 8:28 AM, I activated Actually Smart Summon on my 2025 Tesla Model 3 using the Tesla mobile application to reverse the vehicle from my garage. Before this incident, the vehicle displayed no warnings, alerts, messages, or other indication of a problem, and I had previously usd Actually Smart Summon without similar behavior. Shortly after activation, the Tesla mobile application became unresponsive, and the vehicle did not stop despite my attempts to stop it through the app. I attempted to open the vehicle door during the incident but was unable to do so while the maneuver continued. Because I could no longer stop the vehicle through the app or access the vehicle, I placed my phone in my pocket so I could use both hands to try to stop the vehicle and prevent further damage. At that point, I was no longer pressing or holding the Actually Smart Summon control in the application. As the vehicle continued reversing, I repeatedly repositioned myself behind it and pushed against the rear of the vehicle with my body multiple times. Despite this physical intervention, the vehicle continued reversing and applying rearward force, forcing me to repeatedly move out of its path to avoid being pinned between the vehicle and my neighbor s garage. The vehicle pressed into my neighbor s garage with enough force that the impact transferred to the parked vehicle inside the garage. It did not stop upon the initial impact and continued pressing into the garage afterward. This sustained movement is clearly visible on the preserved TeslaCam footage and independent home-security recordings. I narrowly escaped being crushed between the vehicle and the garage while attempting to stop the vehicle and prevent further damage, sustaining a muscle strain in the process. The incident created a serious risk of bodily injury in addition to substantial property damage. I do not know which specific component or system failed. Based on the sequence of events, the incident
NHTSA ODI #11747470
Mileage unknown · Feb 23, 2026
Back Over PreventionUnknown Or OtherCrash
I was using the vehicle's Autopark feature to parallel park on a public street in a normal/spacious parking spot. I selected the parking spot on the center screen and started Autopark. During the maneuver, the vehicle reversed into the parked car behind me and caused a dent (low-speed crash). I was supervising the maneuver and …
Read full complaint
I was using the vehicle's Autopark feature to parallel park on a public street in a normal/spacious parking spot. I selected the parking spot on the center screen and started Autopark. During the maneuver, the vehicle reversed into the parked car behind me and caused a dent (low-speed crash). I was supervising the maneuver and did not press the accelerator or brake before impact. After the incident, I reviewed dashcam footage and vehicle telemetry. The rear vehicle was clearly visible in the rear camera view. Telemetry shows the vehicle had already shifted to Drive before impact, but it continued moving backward for about 1 second and then contacted the parked car behind. Telemetry also shows accelerator pedal position was 0 and brake was not applied during the impact sequence. This appears to be an automated parking/close-range obstacle stopping failure or delayed stopping response. No warning lamp or prior vehicle fault message was observed before the incident. The issue has not been reproduced since the incident. I have dashcam footage and telemetry logs documenting the event.
NHTSA ODI #11719945
Mileage unknown · Jan 27, 2026
Back Over PreventionStructure
Tesla’s Obstruction of Repairs Tesla deleted my original service complaint and annotations regarding these delivery defects. The associated service appointment was cancelled without notice or rescheduling. No repairs were performed despite the issues being raised during the warranty period. This prevented reasonable repair attem…
Read full complaint
Tesla’s Obstruction of Repairs Tesla deleted my original service complaint and annotations regarding these delivery defects. The associated service appointment was cancelled without notice or rescheduling. No repairs were performed despite the issues being raised during the warranty period. This prevented reasonable repair attempts and allowed the defects to persist. Current Nonconformities and Repair History The same or substantially similar defects continue and have worsened: • Recurring misalignment/alignment issues from delivery, impairing value and potentially safety. • Safety-related camera system failures: Persistent error codes on the camera(s) [specify if known, e.g., front/rear/ADAS-related], reducing visibility and affecting safe operation (e.g., backup, navigation, Autopilot/FSD if equipped). These are known Tesla issues potentially subject to recall (e.g., rearview camera display loss). • Power windows failure: Unresolved for at least 2 weeks despite service request; windows do not operate properly, impairing use and safety (e.g., emergency egress). Cumulative out-of-service time and failed repair attempts (including the obstructed initial one) meet or approach presumptions under § 1793.22(b): multiple attempts for the same nonconformities, with safety impacts. The vehicle remains nonconforming despite reasonable opportunity for Tesla to repair. nonconformities in the above vehicle that qualify it as a “lemon” under California Civil Code §§ 1793.2(d) and 1793.22 (Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act). These defects originated at delivery, were reported within the express warranty period, but Tesla failed to repair them—by deleting my original service complaint, annotating delivery issues without resolution, and cancelling the associated appointment—preventing conformity to warranty. The same issues persist and recur post-warranty expiration, substantially impairing the vehicle’s use, value, and safety
NHTSA ODI #11713524
Mileage unknown · Dec 17, 2025
Back Over PreventionLane DepartureUnknown Or Other
This is a new one but not new for me as this vehicle was the first under my own registration/not rental. Had passenger in car and with music down the passenger heard a very clear odd word which I can only assume was its desire, we declined. This is the umpteenth of many odd and offensive remarks that can cause odd distortion to …
Read full complaint
This is a new one but not new for me as this vehicle was the first under my own registration/not rental. Had passenger in car and with music down the passenger heard a very clear odd word which I can only assume was its desire, we declined. This is the umpteenth of many odd and offensive remarks that can cause odd distortion to within the immersive sound system and was what I previously attributed to rental vehicle blue tooths or dysfunctional family raising. Its offensive, distracting, and sometime low-level so unhealthy. Im awaiting the response from tesla but it should be documented as ive seen ISAC section on this website, and ive dealt with it since 2018 , and ended up having to put boxing gloves in my trunk for potentially violent followers trying to pair and talk obscene. Im not sure what but its been confirmed and im awaiting the reply from manufacturer.
NHTSA ODI #11705606
Mileage unknown · Jun 27, 2025
Back Over PreventionPower TrainUnknown Or OtherCrash
On June 19, 2025, while parking my brand new 2025 Tesla Model 3 in a residential lot, the vehicle unexpectedly accelerated forward over a curb, crashed through a iron fence, and struck an outdoor A/C unit and patio furniture on the back of a neighbor’s unit. The car became stuck and had to be towed. On June 19, 2025, while park…
Read full complaint
On June 19, 2025, while parking my brand new 2025 Tesla Model 3 in a residential lot, the vehicle unexpectedly accelerated forward over a curb, crashed through a iron fence, and struck an outdoor A/C unit and patio furniture on the back of a neighbor’s unit. The car became stuck and had to be towed. On June 19, 2025, while parking my newly delivered Tesla Model 3, the vehicle suddenly and unexpectedly lurched forward, resulting in a crash. I was parking slowly and cautiously with my foot on the brake at all times. According to a neighbor who witnessed the incident, I was moving at a very slow speed when the vehicle suddenly surged forward without warning. I did not intend to accelerate, and I firmly believe this may have been the result of a system malfunction—possibly involving the vehicle’s sensors, software, or misinterpretation of pedal input. Tesla Service reviewed the driving log and stated that it showed I “stepped on the accelerator.” I respectfully dispute this conclusion, as the vehicle’s behavior was completely inconsistent with my actions. I am a careful, experienced driver with no prior accidents in over 30 years of driving. This incident raises serious concerns about Sudden Unintended Acceleration (SUA), a known issue that has been reported by other Tesla drivers in past years. If the vehicle misinterprets driver input or experiences a sensor/software glitch, this can lead to property damage or bodily injury, especially in tight parking situations or near pedestrians. I am submitting this complaint to ensure this matter is documented and investigated appropriately. Safety should not rely on logs alone — real-world behavior, driver feedback, and potential software/hardware flaws must be examined carefully.
NHTSA ODI #11669732
NHTSA investigations
4EA26002 · Fsd Collisions In Reduced Roadway Visibility Conditions
Opened Mar 18, 2026 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:adas
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) is opening this Engineering Analysis to evaluate Tesla’s Full Self Driving Beta and Full Self Driving (Supervised) (collectively, FSD) degradation detection system. The focus of this investigation will be to assess the system’s ability, when encountering reduced roadway visibility conditions, to detect degradation and alert the driver with sufficient time to respond. ODI will evaluate the performance of FSD in degraded roadway conditions and the updates or modifications by Tesla to the degradation detection system, including the timing, purpose, and capabilities of the updates, and Tesla’s assessment of their safety impact. Tesla’s FSD is an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) that relies exclusively on vision-based cameras and the related FSD software to detect and respond to the roadway ahead, projecting a path forward based on traffic control devices, vehicles, pedestrians, and the roadway itself. When Tesla began transitioning away from using both cameras and radars to an exclusively camera-based approach, known as Tesla Vision, in mid-2021, it developed and implemented a degradation detection system that it deployed by a software update to existing and new Tesla vehicles. On June 28, 2024, the day after Tesla submitted the SGO report of the November 28, 2023 fatal crash listed in this document, Tesla began developing an update to the degradation detection system. At this time, ODI does not have information on when the update was deployed and which vehicles have the updated system. ODI discussed individual incidents and its initial findings during the PE phase of its investigation with Tesla. As part of those discussions, Tesla’s post-incident analysis indicated that the update to the degradation detection system, had it been installed on the vehicles at the time, may have affected 3 of the 9 incidents identified by ODI. Tesla also described internal data and labeling limitations that prevented a uniform identification and analysis of crash events with the subject system engaged. ODI believes this limitation could have led to under-reporting of subject crashes over portions of the defined time-period. Available incident data raise concerns that Tesla’s degradation detection system, both as originally deployed and later updated, fails to detect and/or warn the driver appropriately under degraded visibility conditions such as glare and airborne obscurants. In the crashes that ODI has reviewed, the system did not detect common roadway conditions that impaired camera visibility and/or provide alerts when camera performance had deteriorated until immediately before the crash occurred. Review of Tesla’s responses revealed additional crashes that occurred in similar environments and where the system either did not detect a degraded state, and/or it did not present the driver with an alert with adequate time for the driver to react. In each of these crashes, FSD also lost track of or never detected a lead vehicle in its path. In upgrading PE24031 to an Engineering Analysis (EA), ODI will gather further information on the updated degradation detection system, including the status of updating vehicles and scope of compatible vehicles, the system’s visibility degradation detection capability, and alerts or warnings to the driver. Lastly, ODI will conduct analysis on six recent potentially related incidents. These incidents can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-11937, 13781-13211, 13781-13569, 13781-13633, 13781-13693, 13781-13788. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-8004, 13781-7181, 13781-7381, 13781-7767, 13781-7964, 13781-8977, 13781-9267.
PE25012 · Traffic Safety Violations While Full Self Driving ("fsd") Is Engaged
Opened Oct 7, 2025 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:adas
The Office of Defects Investigation (“ODI”) is opening this Preliminary Evaluation (PE) to assess the scope, frequency, and potential safety consequences of FSD executing driving maneuvers that constitute traffic safety violations. This investigation concerns versions of FSD that Tesla has labeled as "FSD (Supervised)" and "FSD (Beta)." Tesla characterizes FSD as an SAE Level 2 partial automation system requiring a fully attentive driver who is engaged in the driving task at all times. Level 2 partial automation systems are designed to support and assist the driver in performing certain aspects of the driving task, requiring a driver to supervise and intervene as necessary. The driver remains fully responsible at all times for driving the vehicle, including complying with applicable traffic laws. ODI’s investigation will therefore focus, in particular, on whether certain driving inputs within the control authority of FSD forestall the driver’s supervision when they are unexpectedly performed. ODI has identified a number of incidents in which the inputs to the dynamic driving task commanded by FSD induced vehicle behavior that violated traffic safety laws. Although reports of this nature span a variety of behaviors, the reports appear to most commonly involve two types of scenarios. The first type of scenario involves a vehicle operating with FSD proceeding into an intersection in violation of a red traffic signal. The second type of scenario involves FSD commanding a lane change into an opposing lane of traffic. With respect to the first type of scenario, ODI has identified 18 complaints and 1 media report alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating at an intersection with FSD engaged, failed to remain stopped for the duration of a red traffic signal, failed to stop fully, or failed to accurately detect and display the correct traffic signal state in the vehicle interface. Some complainants also alleged that FSD did not provide warnings of the system's intended behavior as the vehicle was approaching a red traffic signal. ODI has identified six Standing General Order ("SGO") reports in which a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, approached an intersection with a red traffic signal, continued to travel into the intersection against the red light and was subsequently involved in a crash with other motor vehicles in the intersection. Of these incidents, four crashes resulted in one or more reported injuries. At least some of the incidents appeared to involve FSD proceeding into the intersection after coming to a complete stop. ODI's pre-investigative work, including coordination with the Maryland Transportation Authority and State Police, indicated that the problem may be repeatable, given that multiple subject incidents occurred at the same intersection in Joppa, Maryland. NHTSA understands that Tesla has since taken action to address the issue at this intersection. With respect to the second type of scenario, ODI has identified 2 SGO reports, 18 complaints, and 2 media reports alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, entered opposing lanes of travel during or following a turn, crossed double-yellow lane markings while proceeding straight, or attempted to turn onto a road in the wrong direction despite the presence of wrong-way road signs. Likewise, ODI has identified 4 SGO reports, 6 complaints, and 1 media report alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, proceeded straight through an intersection in a turn-only lane or executed a turn at an intersection in a through lane despite the presence of lane markings or signals. Complaints also alleged that FSD did not provide warnings of the system's intended behavior. Some complaints alleged that more than one of these failures occurred and, as such, the numbers are not cumulative. Some of the reported incidents appeared to involve FSD executing a lane change into an opposing lane of travel with little notice to a driver or opportunity to intervene. ODI’s review will assess whether there was prior warning or adequate time for the driver to respond to the unexpected behavior or to safely supervise the automated driving task. This review will assess any warnings to the driver about the system's impending behavior; the time given to drivers to respond; the capability of FSD to detect, display to the driver, and respond appropriately to traffic signals; and the capability of FSD to detect and respond to lane markings and wrong-way signage. NHTSA's review will also consider any updates or modifications to the system(s) that may affect the performance of FSD with respect to obeying traffic safety laws and signals. This assessment will focus, in particular, on the types of traffic safety violations described above, as most reports identified thus far have centered around those behaviors. While the behaviors under investigation appear to occur most frequently at intersections, NHTSA’s investigation will encompass any other types of situations in which this behavior may arise, such as when traveling adjacent to a lane of opposing traffic or when approaching railroad crossings. If other evidence received during this investigation involve other types of traffic safety violations, those may be considered as part of this assessment as well. To review the ODI reports cited in the Opening Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov. The SGO reports cited in this Resume are listed below by report ID and are available for download at NHTSA.gov/laws-regulations/standing-general-order-crash-reporting. 13781-8739-1, 13781-8995-1, 13781-9623-1, 13781-10333-1, 13781-10872-1, 13781-10930-1, 13781-10939-1, 13781-10941-1, 13781-11069-1, 13781-11305-1, 13781-11579-1 Media reported allegations included as a separate attachment.
AQ25002 · Compliance With Standing General Order 2021-01 Reporting Requirements
Opened Aug 20, 2025 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:adas
The Office of Defects Investigation (“ODI”) has identified numerous incident reports submitted by Tesla, Inc. (“Tesla”) in response to Standing General Order 2021-01 (the “SGO”), in which the reported crashes occurred several months or more before the dates of the reports. The majority of these reports involved crashes in which the Standing General Order in place at the time required a report to be submitted within one or five days of Tesla receiving notice of the crash. When the reports were submitted, Tesla submitted them in one of two ways. Many of the reports were submitted as part of a single batch, while others were submitted on a rolling basis. Preliminary engagement between ODI and Tesla on the issue indicates that the timing of the reports was due to an issue with Tesla’s data collection, which, according to Tesla, has now been fixed. NHTSA is opening this Audit Query, a standard process for reviewing compliance with legal requirements, to evaluate the cause of the potential delays in reporting, the scope of any such delays, and the mitigations that Tesla has developed to address them. As part of this review, NHTSA will assess whether any reports of prior incidents remain outstanding and whether the reports that were submitted include all of the required and available data. The SGO reports cited in the Opening Resume, can be found at NHTSA.gov/SGOCrashReporting under the following SGO 2021-01 report IDs: 13781-11020-1 13781-10844-1 13781-10843-1 13781-10530-1 13781-10160-1 13781-10159-1 13781-10157-1 13781-10146-1 13781-10122-1 13781-10098-1 13781-10097-1 13781-10096-1 13781-10095-1 13781-10094-1 13781-10093-1 13781-10023-1 13781-10022-1 13781-10021-1 13781-10020-1 13781-10017-1 13781-10016-1 13781-10015-1 13781-10014-1 13781-10013-1 13781-10012-1 13781-6047-1 13781-9930-1 13781-9917-1 13781-9928-1 13781-9925-1 13781-9924-1 13781-9923-1 13781-9922-1 13781-9835-1 13781-9834-1 13781-9833-1 13781-9832-1 13781-9831-1 13781-9830-1 13781-9829-1 13781-9827-1 13781-9818-1 13781-9780-1 13781-9779-1 13781-9778-1 13781-9777-1 13781-9775-1 13781-9774-1 13781-9773-1 13781-9772-1 13781-9771-1 13781-9770-1 13781-9728-1 13781-9688-1 13781-9715-1 13781-9714-1 13781-9713-1 13781-9712-1 13781-9711-1 13781-9710-1 13781-9709-1 13781-9696-1 13781-9695-1 13781-9694-1 13781-9693-1 13781-9692-1 13781-9691-1 13781-9690-1 13781-9687-1 13781-9686-1 13781-9342-1 13781-9319-1 13781-9019-1 13781-8910-1 13781-8732-1 13781-8712-1 13781-8310-1 13781-7897-1 13781-7895-1 13781-7835-1 13781-7798-1 13781-7797-1 13781-7758-1 13781-7757-1 13781-7756-1 13781-7755-1 13781-7667-1 13781-7399-1 13781-7398-1 13781-7397-1 13781-7396-1 13781-7395-1 13781-7394-1 13781-7393-1 13781-7389-1 13781-7388-1 13781-7387-1 13781-7386-1 13781-7385-1 13781-7383-1 13781-7187-1 13781-7186-1 13781-7185-1 13781-7184-1 13781-7181-1 13781-7023-1 13781-6399-1 13781-6389-1 13781-6388-1 13781-6387-1 13781-6386-1 13781-6379-1 13781-6378-1 13781-6377-1 13781-6375-1 13781-6214-1 13781-6172-1 13781-6155-1 13781-6154-1 13781-6122-1 13781-6120-1 13781-6118-1 13781-5800-1
PE24033 · Actually Smart Summon Sessions Resulting In low-speed Impacts.
Opened Jan 6, 2025 · Closed Apr 3, 2026
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:adas:autonomous/self Driving
On January 6, 2025, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation 24003 (PE24033) to investigate Actually Smart Summon (Summon) sessions resulting in crashes during active sessions. According to Tesla, Summon is a short-distance SAE Level 2 system, controlled by the user from a cell phone within a certain distance and intended for use in parking lots and on private property. ODI analyzed complaint data provided by Tesla as well as complaints submitted to ODI from consumers to identify Summon incidents resulting in crashes. ODI's analysis indicates that almost all Summon reported crashes involved minor property damage claims with no reported incidents involving a vulnerable road user, injury, fatality, or major property damage as indicated by an air bag deployment or vehicle tow away. Out of millions of Summon sessions, a fraction of 1% resulted in an incident. Almost all those incidents took place where, typically early in a Summon session, the system or person using the app failed to fully detect or respond appropriately to vehicle surroundings resulting in minor impacts. Incidents took place when app users did not have a complete 360-degree view of the surroundings in the app to assess situational awareness. This limited the app user’s ability to determine whether an impact was imminent during initial vehicle maneuvers such as reversing in close proximity to an obstacle or a curb. ODI found that the impacts most often occurred with parking gates, adjacently parked vehicles, and short parking bollards. During this investigation, ODI identified two Summon crashes related to camera blockages. In both crashes, Summon attempted to navigate a snowy parking lot with snow partially or fully obstructing the forward-facing cameras. Summon did not detect the camera blockage and the vehicles collided with unoccupied parked vehicles while navigating the parking lot. App users in both instances did not command a vehicle stop or pause despite the obstructed camera visible in the camera stream in the app. On January 15, 2025, Tesla released Over-the-Air (OTA) Software (SW) Update Action numbers 578998 and 579185 for vehicles in service to implement a camera blockage detection condition. Both OTAs improve camera blockage detection mechanisms. Additionally, on January 20, 2025, and January 30, 2025, Tesla identified additional system requirements associated with camera visibility checks and released OTA SW-578752 and SW-580322, respectively. These firmware updates reduce false negative camera blockage detections due to snow or condensation. In its investigation, ODI identified one Summon incident where the vehicle did not yield for a gate arm blocking a garage exit lane and the app user did not command a vehicle stop or pause, resulting in an impact. On February 6, 2025, Tesla deployed OTA SW-578839 to improve vehicle reaction to dynamic gates. This OTA update upgraded vehicle perception systems through a high-fidelity occupancy determination network, which uses data from vehicle sensory systems to improve reconstruction of field objects with high accuracy. On November 20, 2025, Tesla further improved vehicle performance by adding object detections from a separate neural network through OTA SW-580514. Owners of the affected vehicles received all six OTA SW updates. Tesla also released these SW updates to production vehicles. See online public file for detailed descriptions of all six OTA SW updates. Due to low incident occurrence and low incident severity, this preliminary evaluation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete online public file.
Illustration